Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Land-use portfolios and the management of private landholdings in south-central Indiana

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Regional Environmental Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the study of land-use and land-cover change as an important contributor to regional environmental change, linking household level land-use decisions to particular land-cover patterns has been an enduring challenge. The frequent conflation of land use and land cover has been appropriate and fruitful in regions where extractive activities are common, but the decoupling of household characteristics from land-cover choices in exurban landscapes may require that the two be treated separately. This research employs the concept of a land-use portfolio, defined as a unique combination of land use types, and land cover derived from remote sensing to examine the relationship between land use and land cover at the parcel scale. Data on the type and spatial organization of land use were collected for individual parcels through sketch maps constructed by land owners and then described quantitatively using GIS and spatial metrics from landscape ecology. The results of this analysis suggest that in the naturally forested region of south-central Indiana, parcels are frequently managed as multiple types of land use thereby supporting the portfolio approach. Generally, land-management complexity is related to land-cover fragmentation, but the strength of this relationship varies across portfolio types. In addition, substantial amounts of forest land cover occur in non-forest land uses further supporting the need to treat the two separately to accurately link land use intentions and land cover outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abizaid C, Coomes O (2004) Land use and forest following dynamics in seasonally dry tropical forests of the southern Ycatan Peninsula, Mexico. Land Use Policy 21:71–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agrow K (1996) This land is their land. J For February, pp 30–33

  • Bentley J (1984) Economic and ecological approaches to land fragmentation: in defense of a much-maligned phenomenon. Annual Review of Anthropology 16:31–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Brondizio E, McCracken S, Moran E, Siqueira A, Nelson D, Rodriguez-Pedraza C (2002) The colonist footprint: toward a conceptual framework of deforestation trajectory among small farmers in frontier Amazonia. In: Wood C, Porro R (eds) Deforestation and land use in the Amazon. University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp 133–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown D, Robinson D (2006) Effects of heterogeneity in residential preferences on an agent-based model of urban sprawl. Ecology and Society 11:46

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown D, Pijanowski B, Duh J (2000) Modeling the relationships between land use and land cover on private lands in the Upper Midwest, USA. Journal of Environmental Management 59:247–263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown D, Johnson K, Loveland T, Theobald D (2005) Rural land-use trends in the conterminous United States, 1950–2000. Ecol Appl 15:1851–1863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis M (1993) Old growth in the east. The Cenozoic Society, Richmond

    Google Scholar 

  • DeCoster L (1995) How barns and backlots get nibbled to nothing by tax codes. Am For July/August, pp 41–55

  • Donnelly S, Evans T (2008) Characterizing spatial patterns of land ownership at the parcel level in south-central Indiana, 1928–1997. Landscape and Urban Planning 84:230–240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans T, Moran E (2002) Spatial integration of spatial and biophysical factors related to landcover change. Population and Development Review 28:165–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans T, Green G, Carlson L (2001) Multiscale analysis of landcover composition and landscape management of public and private lands in Indiana. In: Millington A, Walsh S, Osborne P (eds) GIS and remote sensing applications in biogeography and ecology. Kluwer Academic Press, Boston, pp 271–287

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez L, Brown D, Marans R, Nassauer J (2005) Characterizing location preferences in an exurban population: implications for agent-based modeling. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 32:799–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes H (1976) ‘We have a little of everything’: the ecological basis of some agricultural practices in Methana, Trizinia. Ann N Y Acad Sci 268:236–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox J, Rindfuss R, Walsh S, Mishra V (eds) (2003) People and the environment: approaches for linking household and community surveys to remote sensing and GIS. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Frimpong E, Ross-Davis A, Lee J, Broussard S (2006) Biophysical and socioeconomic factors explaining the extent of forest cover on private ownerships in a Midwestern (USA) agrarian landscape. Landscape Ecol 21:763–776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geoghegan J, Pritchard JL, Ogneva-Himmelberger Y, Chowdhury RR, Sanderson TurnerB (1998) “Socializing the Pixel” and “Pixelizing the Social” In land-use and land-cover change. In: Liverman D, Moran E, Rindfuss R, Stern P (eds) People and pixels: linking remote sensing and social science. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Janetos A (2004) Research directions in land-cover and land-use change. In: Gutman G, Janetos A, Justice C, Moran E, Mustard J, Rindfuss R, Skole D, Turner B, Cochrane M (eds) Land change science: observing, monitoring and understanding trajectories of change on earth’s surface. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, p 457

    Google Scholar 

  • Kammerbauer J, Ardon C (1999) Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a typical watershed in the hillside region of central Honduras. Agric Ecosyst Environ 75:93–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klosowski R, Stevens T, Kittridge D, Dennis D (2000) Economic incentives for coordinated management of forest land: a case study of southern New England. Forest Policy and Economics 2:29–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koontz T (2001) Money talks-but to whom? financial versus nonmonetary motivations in land use decisions. Society and Natural Resources 14:51–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurttila M, Hamalainen K, Kajanus M, Pesonen M (2001) Non-industrial provate forest owners’ attitudes towards the operational environment of forestry—a multinomial logit model analysis. Forest Policy and Economics 2:13–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambin E, Geist H, Lepers E (2003) Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environmental Resources 28:205–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey A (1997) Walking in the wilderness. In: Jackson M (ed) The natural heritage of Indiana. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 113–123

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey A, Crankshaw A, Qadir B (1965) Soil relations and distribution map of vegetation of presettlement Indiana. Botanical Gazette 126:155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liverman D, Moran E, Rindfuss R, Stern P (eds) (1998) People and pixels: linking remote sensing and social science. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald K, Rudel T (2005) Sprawl and forest cover: what is the relationship? Applied Geography 25:67–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manson S (2001) Simplifying complexity: a review of complexity theory. Geoforum 32:405–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarigal K, Marks B (1995) FRAGSTATS: spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson J (1998) Indiana’s forests: past, present, and future. 7(3), Indiana department of natural resources, division of forestry

  • Netting R (1972) Of men and meadows: strategies of Alpine land use. Anthropological Quarterly 45:145–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom E, Gardner R, Walker J (1994) Rules, games, and common-pool resources. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Petschel-Held G (2001) Actors and their environments—syndromes of land-use change in developing countries. Global Change Newsletter. International Geosphere Biosphere Programme, Stockholm

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao K, Pant R (2001) Land use dynamics and landscape change pattern in a typical micro watershed in the mid elevation zone of central Himalaya, India. Agric Ecosyst Environ 86:113–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rickenbach M, Gobster P (2003) Stakeholders’ perceptions of parcelization in Wisconsin’s Northwoods. J For 101:18–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlager E, Ostrom E (1992) Property-rights regimes and natural resources: a conceptual analysis. Land Economics 68:249–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner M, Gardner R, O’Neill R (2001) Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • White C (1983) A history of the rectangular survey system. US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Washington

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography and Planning, University of Akron, 302 Buchtel Common, Akron, OH, 44325-5005, USA

    Shanon Donnelly

Authors
  1. Shanon Donnelly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shanon Donnelly.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Donnelly, S. Land-use portfolios and the management of private landholdings in south-central Indiana. Reg Environ Change 11, 97–109 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-010-0124-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-010-0124-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation